"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi

One of my former colleagues was a beta
tester at the time when they were trying to
break into the professional market. I don't have
any experience with Audition, but I do remember
him saying that CEP, at least the version that he
was evaluating, lacked essential functions, like
audio scrub, that would have improved it immensely.

Very obsolete information.

The current version (3.0) and the previous version of Audition (2.0) have
audio scrub.

I find the scrub feature so compelling that I generally avoid using Audition
2.0 which I own. I continue to use CEP 2.1.

Audio scrubbing is one of those holdovers from the days of analog tape that
is surprisingly easy to live without. However, you have to change paradigms
to visual-intensive editing to do that. Visual-intensive editing is
generally more productive.

I do use scrubbing when I edit video, but this is mostly because the video
editing software I use does not provide the same quality visual environment
for editing audio that CEP/Audition does. I periodically export audio from
A/V tracks, edit it in CEP, and then put it back, including restoring
lip-synch by hand if necessary.

Can anyone list the major differences between
CEP2 and Audition?

Adobe should be able to do that. Audition 1.0 and 1.5 were very similar to
CEP 2.1. Check their web site for info about the various release upgrades.

Audition 2.0 was a major rewrite. The UI was redone pretty thoroughly. I
tried to use it as my preferred audio editor for about a year, and then gave
up on it and went back to CEP 2.1.

It would be interesting to
know how the program has developed.

In the opinion of most it seems, not for the better. The product suffers
from adding feature after feature and trying to be all things to all people.